Positively False - Floyd Landis Books

Tour de France, Giro d'Italia, Vuelta a España, Tour Down Under and more

Positively False - Floyd Landis Books

Postby zasa » Tue Sep 04, 2007 2:12 pm

Has anyone here read his new book?
Last edited by zasa on Tue Sep 04, 2007 2:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.
zasa
 
Posts: 6
Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2007 1:47 pm

by BNA » Tue Sep 04, 2007 2:25 pm

BNA
 

Postby europa » Tue Sep 04, 2007 2:25 pm

No link of course - still within the 'trial period'. You aren't perchance referring to the Flandis effort to prove himself a pure as the driven snow are you? Sorry, I'm a bit more choosy about the fiction I read. If the fool had admitted his guilt when caught, he'd be out of suspension now, either that or well into his second and last year.

Richard
I had a good bike ... so I fixed it
User avatar
europa
 
Posts: 7327
Joined: Sun Jul 16, 2006 10:51 am
Location: southern end of Adelaide - home of hills, fixies and drop bears

Re: Positively False - Floyd Landis Books

Postby sogood » Tue Sep 04, 2007 2:33 pm

zasa wrote:Has anyone here read his new book?

No, not interested in helping him to fund his lawyers and PR show. 8)
Bianchi, Ridley, Montague, GT, Garmin and All things Apple :)
RK wrote:And that is Wikipedia - I can write my own definition.
User avatar
sogood
 
Posts: 16928
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 7:31 am
Location: Sydney AU

Postby zasa » Tue Sep 04, 2007 2:33 pm

You don't believe people have a right to defend themselves?
zasa
 
Posts: 6
Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2007 1:47 pm

Postby sogood » Tue Sep 04, 2007 2:34 pm

zasa wrote:You don't believe people have a right to defend themselves?

I do. But I elect not to contribute to his fighting fund in this case.
Bianchi, Ridley, Montague, GT, Garmin and All things Apple :)
RK wrote:And that is Wikipedia - I can write my own definition.
User avatar
sogood
 
Posts: 16928
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 7:31 am
Location: Sydney AU

Postby Kalgrm » Tue Sep 04, 2007 2:39 pm

Certainly people have a right to defend themselves. That's what the court system is for. Writing a book is simply a way of getting the public to believe your version of the truth.

Don't believe everything you read ....

Cheers,
Graeme

(PS - around here, substitute the word "anything" for "everything". ;))
Think outside the double triangle.
---------------------------------------
My web site: www.scenebyhird.com
---------------------------------------
The Bicycle Transportation Alliance
User avatar
Kalgrm
Super Mod
Super Mod
 
Posts: 9236
Joined: Fri May 25, 2007 5:21 pm
Location: Spearwood, 9km SE of Fremantle, WA

Postby europa » Tue Sep 04, 2007 2:40 pm

zasa wrote:You don't believe people have a right to defend themselves?


There's a difference between 'defend' and 'blatant cover up with lies and false accusations'.

If Flandis wants respect, he can come clean and apologise. It's worked for everyone else who's tried it. In the meantime, cycling is the loser, not poor Flandis.

Richard
I had a good bike ... so I fixed it
User avatar
europa
 
Posts: 7327
Joined: Sun Jul 16, 2006 10:51 am
Location: southern end of Adelaide - home of hills, fixies and drop bears

Postby mikesbytes » Tue Sep 04, 2007 2:48 pm

Didn't he test positive to excess chocolate milk consumption?
A helmet saved my life
User avatar
mikesbytes
Super Mod
Super Mod
 
Posts: 14733
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 10:42 pm
Location: Tempe, Sydney

Postby sogood » Tue Sep 04, 2007 2:48 pm

Bear in mind, Landis isn't exactly a poor guy needing to use legal aid. Selling publicity is just a standard way to make money. And I doubt that he wrote everything himself. More like being heavily assisted by the PR machine.
Bianchi, Ridley, Montague, GT, Garmin and All things Apple :)
RK wrote:And that is Wikipedia - I can write my own definition.
User avatar
sogood
 
Posts: 16928
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 7:31 am
Location: Sydney AU

Postby toolonglegs » Tue Sep 04, 2007 3:44 pm

Gulity until proven innocent...
Last edited by toolonglegs on Wed Jun 16, 2010 5:37 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
toolonglegs
 
Posts: 14331
Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 7:49 pm
Location: Somewhere with padded walls and really big hills!

Postby Bnej » Tue Sep 04, 2007 3:49 pm

I read the articles about the tests he failed at the time, and it's pretty damning evidence.

I'm not interested in reading a book of excuses.
User avatar
Bnej
 
Posts: 2880
Joined: Fri Jun 30, 2006 11:43 pm
Location: Katoomba, NSW

Postby tallywhacker » Wed Sep 05, 2007 12:24 pm

Didn't Ian Thorpe test positive for "abnormal levels" of 2 banned substances (testosterone and epitestosterone) and was just exonerated because they were "naturally occurring".
What I find interesting is people's different reactions to both and that in both cases they were "outed" by L'Equipe

just my 2 bobs worth
User avatar
tallywhacker
 
Posts: 1598
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2007 3:21 pm
Location: on the road

Postby europa » Wed Sep 05, 2007 12:34 pm

tallywhacker wrote:Didn't Ian Thorpe test positive for "abnormal levels" of 2 banned substances (testosterone and epitestosterone) and was just exonerated because they were "naturally occurring".
What I find interesting is people's different reactions to both and that in both cases they were "outed" by L'Equipe

just my 2 bobs worth


The results from Flandis' tests were the result of artificial testosterone, not natural.

There are sportsmen (and women) who get caught by tests and later exonerated - thing is, they don't behave like this clown has done. Then there are those that just accept they got caught and put their hand up.

Richard
I had a good bike ... so I fixed it
User avatar
europa
 
Posts: 7327
Joined: Sun Jul 16, 2006 10:51 am
Location: southern end of Adelaide - home of hills, fixies and drop bears

Postby Bnej » Wed Sep 05, 2007 12:35 pm

They take a base level, as many top athletes have abnormally high testosterone levels anyway. Subsequent testing compares against whatever your natural base level is, and it's the variation that brings suspicion.

Not only did Landis have something in the region of 10 times his base level (heavy drinking can explain something like a 2x higher reading in men and a smaller effect in women), they know from analysis that it was synthetic.

If they had similar evidence against Thorpe he would have been banned too.

Not to mention that what he did was basically impossible. I was watching the coverage a bit at the time and found it really crazy that he could go and make a solo breakaway like that. You don't see that kind of variation at the top levels of most sports.
User avatar
Bnej
 
Posts: 2880
Joined: Fri Jun 30, 2006 11:43 pm
Location: Katoomba, NSW

Postby sogood » Wed Sep 05, 2007 1:05 pm

europa wrote:There are sportsmen (and women) who get caught by tests and later exonerated - thing is, they don't behave like this clown has done. Then there are those that just accept they got caught and put their hand up.

Yes, this aspect makes him most unlikable. At the same time, he is taking the whole sport of cycling down with him using every trick in the PR spin trade. Pretty pathetic.
Bianchi, Ridley, Montague, GT, Garmin and All things Apple :)
RK wrote:And that is Wikipedia - I can write my own definition.
User avatar
sogood
 
Posts: 16928
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 7:31 am
Location: Sydney AU

Postby tallywhacker » Wed Sep 05, 2007 2:05 pm

europa wrote:
tallywhacker wrote:Didn't Ian Thorpe test positive for "abnormal levels" of 2 banned substances (testosterone and epitestosterone) and was just exonerated because they were "naturally occurring".
What I find interesting is people's different reactions to both and that in both cases they were "outed" by L'Equipe

just my 2 bobs worth


The results from Flandis' tests were the result of artificial testosterone, not natural.

There are sportsmen (and women) who get caught by tests and later exonerated - thing is, they don't behave like this clown has done. Then there are those that just accept they got caught and put their hand up.

Richard


all the reports I read talked about "2 banned substances". How can you ban a substance that occurrs naturally in your body ?
User avatar
tallywhacker
 
Posts: 1598
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2007 3:21 pm
Location: on the road

Postby sogood » Wed Sep 05, 2007 2:27 pm

tallywhacker wrote:all the reports I read talked about "2 banned substances". How can you ban a substance that occurrs naturally in your body ?

1) If it's synthetic.
2) If it's in unnatural concentration.
3) If it's unphysiological.
Bianchi, Ridley, Montague, GT, Garmin and All things Apple :)
RK wrote:And that is Wikipedia - I can write my own definition.
User avatar
sogood
 
Posts: 16928
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 7:31 am
Location: Sydney AU


Return to International and National Tours and Events

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users



Popular Bike Shops
Torpedo 7 Torpedo7 AU
Ground Effect Ground Effect NZ
Chain Reaction Cycles CRC UK
Wiggle Wiggle UK
Ebay Ebay AU



InTouch with BNA
“Bicycles BNA Twitter
“Bicycles BNA Facebook
“Google+ BNA Google+
“Bicycles BNA Newsletter